10 July’s The Platform debate between Julian Batchelor and Buddy Mikaere, skillfully moderated by Sean Plunket, helped to highlight some of the issues in the co-governance controversy with particular reference to Batchelor’s meetings around the country.
Good article. Another myth is that of “institutional racism”. I think the only racist institutions were those in South Africa under apartheid. In reality it is people who can be racist, not organisations. It is a weasel way of accusing our dedicated medical staff of being racist and so insulting and a gross generalisation.
Don’t get me started on unconscious bias, another bullshit term.
Interesting article, which is of course an expression of the individual sovereign point of view.
NZ has a unique position with regard to it’s sovereignty that few New Zealanders comprehend.
When the settlers and the chiefs of nz joined together to declare nz in it’s entirety as sovereign in 1835 they created an entire nation of sovereign people operating together in a federation of and for all people of all races who settle here.
This was recognised by the British crown (King William the 4th) plus the USA & France among others. It is even recognised today by the UN.
The crown panicked and sent Hobson here to take that sovereignty off the settlers and chiefs, but he was thwarted when Henry Williams added the last be tinorangitiratanga to the te reo version of the treaty.
Tinorangitiratanga meant we all (settlers and Maori) retained our sovereignty.
Local language takes precedence in treaty and contract so sovereignty was saved.
This has been acknowledged by the crown including in the statements by the attorney general in 2014 & 2022 in which the crown stated sovereignty was not ceded by the treaty and the declaration still hold legal precedence, and nothing since then has changed that. The AG stated this was the inescapable conclusion in law.
The crown is desperately trying to continue its illegal governance thru bringing in co governance. It that is foiled they hope to create so much racial division that the federation is unable to operate.
People like Julian Batchelor & Muriel Newman are playing right into the crowns hand by adding to racial hatred instead of exposing the crown and educating people on the Declaration of Independence of nz (known in Maori as He Wakaputunga)
Glen McConnell's comment does not refute or even mention my explanation why the "we were here first" argument is illegitimate.
The 1835 Declaration is a completely different point but is also spurious. Mr McConnell is asserting that some Maori chiefs. and some settlers "created an entire nation of sovereign people operating together in a federation of and for all people of all races who settle here." It did no such thing. The 1835 Declaration was instigated by the British Resident James Busby, in response to a declaration by Charles Philippe Hippolyte de Thierry who was purporting (in dispatches from Tahiti) to declare independence for New Zealand, "that is my own Independence as Sovereign Chief."
In response, Busby called 34 northern chiefs together, at Waitangi, on 28 October 1835 to persuade them De Thierry's claims should be denied. The result of the meeting was the chiefs' declaration that they (the Confederation of the United Tribes) were sovereign over their territories (from about Thames northwards).
This exercise created some understanding of such matters by those chiefs and no doubt smoothed the way for the 1840 Treaty which was presented to "the chiefs of the Confederation chiefs of the subtribes of New Zealand and other chiefs." The short point is that whatever status ought properly to be attributed to the 1935 Declaration, it was overtaken by the Treaty, which ended: "So we, the Chiefs of the Confederation of the subtribes of New Zealand meeting here at Waitangi having seen the shape of these words which we accept and agree to record our names and our marks thus. Was done at Waitangi on the sixth of February in the year of our Lord 1840."
Regarding te tino rangatiratanga, it is in Article 2 by which the Crown agreed to "protect the chiefs, the subtribes and all the people of New Zealand in the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship over their lands, villages and all their treasures." By Article 1 they had "give[n] absolutely to the Queen of England forever the complete government over their land."
The quotations from the Treaty are Sir Hugh Kawharu's translation of the text signed by the chiefs. The words speak for themselves and give the lie to those who now try to maintain that governmental authority is vested elsewhere than in the Crown.
Sir Apirana Ngata stated it as clearly as may be in his 1922 booklet The Treaty of Waitangi An Explanation. (written as an explanation to "an old lady who asked me quite recently, "Now
you tell me what are its conditions and why is it the subject of discussion on the maraes?".) Of Article 1, he said:
"These are but a few words but they indicate a complete cession. This was the transfer by the Maori Chiefs to the Queen of England for ever of the Government of all their lands. What was the thing they transferred? What was the thing which they gave away so freely for ever? It was the Government of their lands. You are somewhat confused with the purport of those words "their lands" as being just a land matter. No, the real meaning includes "their boundaries or territories". The English word in the
English version of the Treaty, "territories". What is a "Government?" The English word is "Sovereignty". The English word for such a personage as a King or Queen is "Sovereign". This is the same as the Maori words "Ariki Tapairu" and is referred to as the absolute authority. The "Sovereign Power" of the English rests with the King or Queen and his or her Council called Parliament. This gives a clearer understanding of the term "Government" as used in this article of the Treaty, that is, it is the
absolute authority over the people which the article transmits into the hands of the Queen and her
Personally I doubt Maori were the first people here. It may be that Europeans settled here before the Maori but the government would rather the archaeological sites in Waipoua Forest were swept under the rug.
Good article. Another myth is that of “institutional racism”. I think the only racist institutions were those in South Africa under apartheid. In reality it is people who can be racist, not organisations. It is a weasel way of accusing our dedicated medical staff of being racist and so insulting and a gross generalisation.
Don’t get me started on unconscious bias, another bullshit term.
Interesting article, which is of course an expression of the individual sovereign point of view.
NZ has a unique position with regard to it’s sovereignty that few New Zealanders comprehend.
When the settlers and the chiefs of nz joined together to declare nz in it’s entirety as sovereign in 1835 they created an entire nation of sovereign people operating together in a federation of and for all people of all races who settle here.
This was recognised by the British crown (King William the 4th) plus the USA & France among others. It is even recognised today by the UN.
The crown panicked and sent Hobson here to take that sovereignty off the settlers and chiefs, but he was thwarted when Henry Williams added the last be tinorangitiratanga to the te reo version of the treaty.
Tinorangitiratanga meant we all (settlers and Maori) retained our sovereignty.
Local language takes precedence in treaty and contract so sovereignty was saved.
This has been acknowledged by the crown including in the statements by the attorney general in 2014 & 2022 in which the crown stated sovereignty was not ceded by the treaty and the declaration still hold legal precedence, and nothing since then has changed that. The AG stated this was the inescapable conclusion in law.
The crown is desperately trying to continue its illegal governance thru bringing in co governance. It that is foiled they hope to create so much racial division that the federation is unable to operate.
People like Julian Batchelor & Muriel Newman are playing right into the crowns hand by adding to racial hatred instead of exposing the crown and educating people on the Declaration of Independence of nz (known in Maori as He Wakaputunga)
Glen McConnell's comment does not refute or even mention my explanation why the "we were here first" argument is illegitimate.
The 1835 Declaration is a completely different point but is also spurious. Mr McConnell is asserting that some Maori chiefs. and some settlers "created an entire nation of sovereign people operating together in a federation of and for all people of all races who settle here." It did no such thing. The 1835 Declaration was instigated by the British Resident James Busby, in response to a declaration by Charles Philippe Hippolyte de Thierry who was purporting (in dispatches from Tahiti) to declare independence for New Zealand, "that is my own Independence as Sovereign Chief."
In response, Busby called 34 northern chiefs together, at Waitangi, on 28 October 1835 to persuade them De Thierry's claims should be denied. The result of the meeting was the chiefs' declaration that they (the Confederation of the United Tribes) were sovereign over their territories (from about Thames northwards).
This exercise created some understanding of such matters by those chiefs and no doubt smoothed the way for the 1840 Treaty which was presented to "the chiefs of the Confederation chiefs of the subtribes of New Zealand and other chiefs." The short point is that whatever status ought properly to be attributed to the 1935 Declaration, it was overtaken by the Treaty, which ended: "So we, the Chiefs of the Confederation of the subtribes of New Zealand meeting here at Waitangi having seen the shape of these words which we accept and agree to record our names and our marks thus. Was done at Waitangi on the sixth of February in the year of our Lord 1840."
Regarding te tino rangatiratanga, it is in Article 2 by which the Crown agreed to "protect the chiefs, the subtribes and all the people of New Zealand in the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship over their lands, villages and all their treasures." By Article 1 they had "give[n] absolutely to the Queen of England forever the complete government over their land."
The quotations from the Treaty are Sir Hugh Kawharu's translation of the text signed by the chiefs. The words speak for themselves and give the lie to those who now try to maintain that governmental authority is vested elsewhere than in the Crown.
Sir Apirana Ngata stated it as clearly as may be in his 1922 booklet The Treaty of Waitangi An Explanation. (written as an explanation to "an old lady who asked me quite recently, "Now
you tell me what are its conditions and why is it the subject of discussion on the maraes?".) Of Article 1, he said:
"These are but a few words but they indicate a complete cession. This was the transfer by the Maori Chiefs to the Queen of England for ever of the Government of all their lands. What was the thing they transferred? What was the thing which they gave away so freely for ever? It was the Government of their lands. You are somewhat confused with the purport of those words "their lands" as being just a land matter. No, the real meaning includes "their boundaries or territories". The English word in the
English version of the Treaty, "territories". What is a "Government?" The English word is "Sovereignty". The English word for such a personage as a King or Queen is "Sovereign". This is the same as the Maori words "Ariki Tapairu" and is referred to as the absolute authority. The "Sovereign Power" of the English rests with the King or Queen and his or her Council called Parliament. This gives a clearer understanding of the term "Government" as used in this article of the Treaty, that is, it is the
absolute authority over the people which the article transmits into the hands of the Queen and her
Parliamentary Council."
Personally I doubt Maori were the first people here. It may be that Europeans settled here before the Maori but the government would rather the archaeological sites in Waipoua Forest were swept under the rug.
https://www.elocal.co.nz/Articles/2107
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Reaping+the+whirlwind+united+we+stand%2C+divided+we+fall%3A+the+Ngapuhi...-a0341131895
https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/WT/wt_DOC_111494834/Wai%2038%2C%20D022(a).pdf